←back to thread

303 points FigurativeVoid | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
williamdclt ◴[] No.41846904[source]
Physics has kinda-solved what it means to know something.

- JTB is not enough, for something to be “true” it needs _testability_. In other words, make a prediction from your knowledge-under-test which would be novel information (for example, “we’ll find fresh cow dung in the field”). - nothing is really ever considered “true”, there’s only theories that describe reality increasingly correctly

In fact, physics did away with the J: it doesn’t matter that your belief is justified if it’s tested. You could make up a theory with zero justification (which doesn’t contradict existing knowledge ofc), make predictions and if they’re tested, that’s still knowledge. The J is just the way that beliefs are formed (inference)

replies(4): >>41846998 #>>41847028 #>>41847431 #>>41847633 #
1. diggan ◴[] No.41846998[source]
Why did the physicist stop hanging out with philosophers?

Because every time they said, "I've found the absolute truth," the philosophers just replied, "Only in your frame of reference!"